>On Monday March 1, 2004 Adam Williams
<awilliam(a)mdah.state.ms.us>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Hi, I know this list is for fedora, but I don't know of an enterprise
>> mail list, and I figured some of you out there may run ES 2.1 and
>> could help. I have a server I need to upgrade to kernel 2.6 for >2GB
>> file size for samba file support. I recompiled from redhat 9 source
>> rpms the
>> required things, except binutils, procps, and modutils won't compile
>>with rpmbuild --rebuild, they all error out. So I thought maybe I
>> could
>> just download the RH9 binary rpms and install them, but it errors
>>saying failed dependancies, libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) required. RedHat ES
>> 2.1 comes with glibc 2.2.4, so I'm looking for some suggestions how
>> to upgrade these 3 packages so I can upgrade to kernel 2.6. any
>>suggestions? Thanks!
>>
>>
dsavage(a)peaknet.net wrote:
>
>Adam,
>
>Is there any particular reason why you cannot upgrade to RHEL/ES v3.0?
> It's not as advanced as Fedora Core, but the difference isn't nearly so
> large as with RHEL/ES v2.1. You'd still have to recompile stuff, but
> maybe not as much.
>
>--Doc Savage
> Fairview Heights, IL
We use a proprietary piece of software called Exlibris Aleph
(library
cataloging software) and it uses Oracle 9 for its database.
Unfortunately, Exlibris tells us they only support RH ES 2.1 because
thats what Oracle supports, and what Exlibris's code will compile
against. We originally tried RH9 and even after extensive modification
of their code, they couldn't get it all to compile correctly. Our
server with the large RAID array is this server, and the only server we
have with a large enough RAID array to temporrarilly hold the backups
while they are written to tape.
Adam,
I could be very mistaken here (if so, don't be shy), but I believe Oracle
supports RHEL/ES v3.0 as well as v2.1. In fact, I seem to recall a story
in the tech trades a few weeks back that said Oracle + RHEL/ES v3 have
earned acceptance under the Common Criteria program for U.S. government
purchase and use. If it's Exlibris that doesn't support v3.0, though,
that's a different situation entirely. I could probably come up with a
quick list of a dozen reasons why their code could be v2.1-specific. One
that comes almost instantly to mind might be code that's not thread-safe
in an NPTL environment. I'm beginning to appreciate your problem.
--Doc Savage
Fairview Heights, IL